From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mina86@mina86.com (Michal Nazarewicz) Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 13:48:11 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 04/11] mm: page_alloc: introduce alloc_contig_range() In-Reply-To: <20120116090110.GA2929@csn.ul.ie> References: <1325162352-24709-1-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <1325162352-24709-5-git-send-email-m.szyprowski@samsung.com> <20120110141613.GB3910@csn.ul.ie> <20120116090110.GA2929@csn.ul.ie> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 10:01:10 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: > On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 09:04:31PM +0100, Michal Nazarewicz wrote: >> >On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 01:39:05PM +0100, Marek Szyprowski wrote: >> >>From: Michal Nazarewicz >> >>+ /* Make sure all pages are isolated. */ >> >>+ if (!ret) { >> >>+ lru_add_drain_all(); >> >>+ drain_all_pages(); >> >>+ if (WARN_ON(test_pages_isolated(start, end))) >> >>+ ret = -EBUSY; >> >>+ } >> >> On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 15:16:13 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote: >> >Another global IPI seems overkill. Drain pages only from the local CPU >> >(drain_pages(get_cpu()); put_cpu()) and test if the pages are isolated. >> >> Is get_cpu() + put_cpu() required? Won't drain_local_pages() work? >> > > drain_local_pages() calls smp_processor_id() without preemption > disabled. Thanks, I wasn't sure if preemption is an issue. -- Best regards, _ _ .o. | Liege of Serenely Enlightened Majesty of o' \,=./ `o ..o | Computer Science, Micha? ?mina86? Nazarewicz (o o) ooo +------------------ooO--(_)--Ooo--